Digital isn't all as it seems

  35mm film vs. digital high definition is a topic that has been ongoing for years now. I myself like film as it has a certain feel that digital cannot totally replicate. Yet I also like high definition because it’s a format that is more accessible to me at my stage of career.

  I recently read an article on laweekly.com about how Hollywood is pushing to end 35mm film in favor of digital. There are a lot of directors that still extol the virtues of film. Chris Nolan is one of them. In the article it said that Chris Nolan gathered a lot of his fellow directors and made a plea for the continued use and survival of film.

  Studios see the money that can be saved going digital as they no longer have to spend as much making prints and sending them out to theaters to be shown. The cost of shipping out a digital print of the movie is a fraction of the cost. With that being said I can see the why studios are pushing for this as they can cut down on their cost and see a greater return when the box office starts rolling in.

  It sounds like a dream but upon further investigation it can prove to be a nightmare for some. It seems that although the studios will save money the theater owners and chains actually take the brunt of the expense. Digital projectors are not cheap. Also their bulbs need to be replaced two or three times more than a film projector. Those are just some of the issues.

  My biggest concern and this concern is also stated in the article is about the archiving of movies. With film you have a negative that’s put in a can and stored in a temperature controlled room and it can last for decades. Allowing for the project to be revisited and rereleased on any new digital format that comes along. Unfortunately digital technology doesn’t have as long of a life span. Data can be corrupted if the hard disks aren’t powered on from time to time.

  It really concerns me because if we were to totally switch over to digital in time a lot of films could be lost because of data being lost. Not to mention it actually costs more to store digital data in the long run. So digital seems to be the magic bullet but in reality there are a host of all new problems that creep up when you take a closer look.

  I for one think a viable solution would be to continue making at least one or two film prints of a film whether it’s shot digitally or on film for archival purposes. There is nothing worse than losing a piece of history.